Johnston, Dorothy, 'Richard II and the submissions of Gaelic Ireland', Irish Historical Studies 22 (1980), 1-20

-

Quick Summary

Richard won the submission of Irish rebels in 1394-5, creating a theoretical base for lasting peace in Ireland

  • Richard’s departure from Ireland left in place a fragile peace
  • Irish rebels viewed Richard’s lordship in terms that were acceptable in Gaelic society
  • The lords entrusted to govern Ireland destroyed Gaelic faith in royal protection
Key Conclusion

Johnston explores the submission of Gaelic Irish rebels following a successful military campaign to Ireland led by King Richard II in 1394-5. Richard exacted oaths of liege homage from the rebels, providing a ‘theoretical base’ for a lasting peace in the English colony of Ireland (p. 11). The success of Richard’s policies in 1394-5 hinted at what could be achieved given the continued investment of time, money and men. However, Johnston concludes that Richard’s departure from Ireland left in place a fragile peace. Maintenance of Richard’s achievement was entrusted to the old Anglo-Irish lords who went on to pursue their own territorial ambitions. This alienated Richard’s Gaelic Irish subjects who were led to expect protection from English crown.

Content Overview

Richard’s policy was based on the concept of Ireland as one lordship – all inhabitants were subjects of the English king whatever their racial distinction (i.e. Anglo-Irish or Gaelic). This policy aimed to achieve a ‘legal redefinition of the king’s relations with his Gaelic Irish subjects’, the ultimate expression of which lay in the submission and liege homage of the Irish rebels (p. 2). Johnston demonstrates that the rebels viewed Richard’s lordship in terms that were ‘acceptable within Gaelic society, where the concept of comairce, or protection, was a familiar reason for submission’ (p. 8). The Irish rebels, then, would look to the English King as their protector, and expected access to royal justice if attacked by their fellow subjects.

Further Findings

Historians have tended to neglect the significance of the Gaelic submissions in 1394-5. The submissions have been seen as a ‘poor alternative to military conquest’, leading scholars to conclude that Richard II failed in Ireland. However, Johnston argues that Richard succeeded in winning ‘more widespread submissions from Gaelic Ireland than any of his predecessors had done’ (p. 1). Moreover, these submissions were an integral part of his policy. The problem, as Johnston sees it, was that Richard’s settlement with the Irish rested on the practical arrangements for the provision of justice. The conduct of those Richard entrusted to govern in Ireland in his absence destroyed Gaelic faith in royal protection. The country reverted to its former pattern of endemic unrest.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Phillpotts, Christopher, 'The fate of the truce of Paris, 1396-1415', Journal of Medieval History 24 (1998), 61-80

-
Quick Summary The Truce of Paris (1396) formed a framework to reduce the level of warfare between England and France up until 1415 The focus of the truce changed depending on the particular ambitions of subsequent English kings Richard II maintained the truce after 1397 to secure dowry payments from France Henry IV and Charles VI put their differences aside to establish a peace between kingdoms Key Conclusion Phillpotts explores the longest truce of the Hundred Years War, agreed at Paris between Richard II of England and Charles VI of France in 1396, and its subsequent extension, redefinition and clarification until 1415. Truces reduced the level of warfare, rather than ended it, and needed to be periodically renegotiated to be effective. Phillpotts concludes that the truce of 1396 ‘formed the central framework of a series of general and particular truces’. The focus of the truce changed between 1396 and 1314, from Richard II’s initial concern to p...
Read more

Theilmann, John M., 'Stubbs, Shakespeare, and Recent Historians of Richard II', Albion 8 (1976), 107-124

-
Quick Summary The idea that Richard II was a tyrant persists even though a satisfactory history of his reign is yet to be written According to the Stubbsean Orthodoxy, Richard II was a coldly calculating king A revision to the Stubbsean Orthodoxy cast Richard II as insane Existing research distorts history by its fixation on constitutional issues Key Conclusion Theilmann explores the historiography of Richard II’s reign from the 1890s to the 1970s and, in particular, the verdict reached by historians about his approach to kingship. This historiographical review leads Theilmann to conclude that the traditional interpretation of Richard’s reign – the ‘Stubbsean Orthodoxy’ – has been slowly challenged but its influence remains strong. According to this Orthodoxy, Richard II was a ‘coldly calculating king’ (p. 110). He was a tyrant determined to diminish parliament and destroy constitutional government. Theilmann notes that while more recent research h...
Read more

Wilkinson, B., 'The Peasants’ Revolt of 1381', Speculum 15 (1940), 12-35

-
Quick Summary The Peasants’ Revolt of 1381 was primarily a ‘movement of reaction’ against John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster Historians have paid too much attention to one particular source Common hatred of John of Gaunt brought the Londoners and the rebels together After the destruction of Gaunt’s palace in London the Peasants’ Revolt began to wane Key Conclusion Wilkinson provides a revisionist interpretation of the events in London during the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. Wilkinson contends that historians have paid too much attention to one particular source – the return of the jurors in the Sheriffs’ Inquisitions of 1382. The evidence presented to the Sheriffs’ Inquisitions was ‘thoroughly and, it seems likely, intentionally misleading’ (p. 12), since the London jurors ‘did their best to conceal the powerful support which Londoners themselves gave to the revolt’ (p. 29). Wilkinson concludes that the revolt was primarily a ‘movement of reaction against J...
Read more